recommends on high power, receive sensitivity 802.11gn

[lifespeed]

I have decided to buy the wired and wireless functions for my home network separately. While it is 'just' a home network, I use wireless (and bluetooth, for that matter) quite a bit for VoIP telephony. I made a decision a while ago that I wasn't going to scatter random consumer radios around my house to create interference, instead I stuck with the two standards that are each slightly aware of the other.

So I would like to get a high-power access point that offers 2.4 GHz 802.11gn. 5 GHz 802.11n would be a bonus feature for future proofing, but I don't have a client device for this today. I am not interested in 802.11a or b.

Features I am looking for are external antennas (3 preferable), power output of at least 250mW, 600mW preferred. Some sort of mounting ability would be good, as I intend to put this in my attic. Power over ethernet is a definite must-have, compliance with 802.11af+ would be good. I assume I'll need the newer high-power POE standard for a high power AP.

By high power, I mean a good linear radio that can maintain the high power levels while transmitting the high-order modulation schemes that are used for the high data rate formats available under wireless G and N. It is revealing to read different manufacturers spec sheets about RF power vs data rate. There are few that can put out high power doing 802.11n high rate modulation.

Anybody have experience with the amount of signal loss through an asphalt shingle roof? No aluminum on the insulation. The lot is about 100' X 70', and with a DGL-4300 (centrally located, 5' high, 3 dB dipole) I have dead spots in the garage and the edges of the lot.

I'm trying to find a device under $200, if possible.

 

[tipstir]

Isn't the Buffalo top of the line wireless N/Gig router 800mW as reported here on SNB. Why are you worried about A-Shingle for?

 

[stevech]

Isn't the Buffalo top of the line wireless N/Gig router 800mW as reported here on SNB. Why are you worried about A-Shingle for?

what good is 800mW on the access point/router if the client is (as they typically are), 30-60mW? Especially where the link speeds (uplink/downlink) must run a the speed of the least common denominator, as is the case with most all 11g, many 11n)

 

[thiggins]

If you are trying to cover inside and out, you might consider two APs.

Take a look at Engenius and Ubiquiti

 

[lifespeed]

The Ubiquiti BulletM2HP looks very interesting, combined with this 9 dBi dipole antenna that has a downward radiation pattern. I am somewhat concerned about the asphalt shingles as my plan was to mount the antenna and AP in the attic for maximum coverage both indoor and outdoor. I suspect the signal outside the house will still be adequate.

As to high power AP vs a weak client, that is partially correct. But antenna gain works in both directions. My bluetooth experiences (100mW class 1 Sena Parani UD-100) showed that even a weak 2.5mW class 2 cellphone headset works remarkably well when the gain of the 5 dBi dipole antenna is applied to the signal. In fact, the bluetooth headset has slightly better range than the 802.11g smartphones. So a good antenna and proper location is key, although I do have my eye on an upgrade to the class 1 Savi Go headset.

Two access points would likely provide coverage with lower transmitted power and antenna gain, but I think it is unlikely that my smartphones and VoIP clients would seemlessly switch access points in the middle of a phone call as I walked from one antenna to the other.

Lastly, the Buffalo router/AP is not interesting because the bidirectional QOS feature I want in a wired router is only available from a couple vendors.

 

[stevech]

As to high power AP vs a weak client, that is partially correct. But antenna gain works in both directions. My bluetooth experiences (100mW class 1 Sena Parani UD-100) showed that even a weak 2.5mW class 2 cellphone headset works remarkably well when the gain of the 5 dBi dipole antenna is applied to the signal.

Don't forget that data rate influences "range": lower data rate, lower channel bandwidth and less required signal-to-noise ratio. For some transmitter power, antenna gains, and receiver sensitivity, as the speed reduces, and usually the channel size reduces too, the range will increase. With a Bluetooth headset audio profile, a pretty bad bit error rate is tolerated (thanks to our brain) and low data rate play favor.